"House OKs Bill to Arm Airline Pilots"
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"House OKs Bill to Arm Airline Pilots"
I can't believe no one posted this yet. Anyhow, ...
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...pilots_guns_11
------------
WASHINGTON (AP) - Airline pilots could carry guns in the cockpit to defend their planes against terrorists under a bill the House passed overwhelmingly Wednesday despite the opposition of the White House.
The legislation, approved by a vote of 310-113, would allow guns for more than 70,000 pilots if they agreed to undergo training. Lawmakers stripped out provisions that would have limited the program to some 1,400 pilots, about 2 percent of those flying.
Despite the strong House support, prospects in the Senate were not good for the legislation. Besides the White House, those opposing it include Ernest Hollings, a South Carolina Democrat who heads the Senate Commerce Committee.
The guns-in-cockpits question is among a host of aviation security issues that arose after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. In this case, House GOP leaders have been at odds with the administration, which has repeatedly argued that cockpit crews should focus on flying planes and let air marshals worry about security.
Though Republican and Democratic leaders of the House Transportation Committee agreed to arm only a fraction of the pilots, rank-and-file lawmakers voted to expand the program to any pilot who volunteers.
"If there is a credible threat that requires arming pilots, why would you restrict yourself?" said an amendment sponsor, Rep. Peter DeFazio ( news, bio, voting record), D-Ore. "Having that minuscule number of pilots trained and armed would not make any sense. If the pilots should be armed, there should be some significant number."
The measure also would require more self-defense training for flight attendants and give the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) 90 days to act on an airline's request to equip pilots and flight attendants with non-lethal weapons such as stun guns.
"Today, armed F-16s are prepared to shoot down any commercial jet that is hijacked by terrorists," said Transportation Committee chairman Don Young, R-Alaska. "It is imperative that under these new circumstances, we must allow trained and qualified pilots to serve as the last line of defense against such a potential disaster."
Opponents of the legislation have expressed concern that an errant bullet could kill a passenger or knock out a critical electrical system.
A flight attendants union also opposed arming pilots.
"Giving guns to pilots without specific cabin defense requirements for airlines could be deadly for flight attendants and passengers," Patricia Friend, president of the Association of Flight Attendants, said last month.
TSA head John Magaw, who announced the administration's position against guns in cockpits, has said that a pilot should give undivided attention to flying his plane, landing it as quickly as possible and conducting in-flight maneuvers to keep hijackers off balance.
Rep. John Mica ( news, bio, voting record), chairman of the House aviation subcommittee, dismissed the administration's objections.
"Bureaucrats set the rules. We set the policy and the laws," said Mica, R-Fla.
Pilots' unions said their members needed the guns to prevent terrorists from breaking into cockpits and commandeering airplanes, as happened last September.
The Air Line Pilots Association ( news - web sites) has contributed $764,000 to federal candidates since Jan. 1, 2001. That's more in donations than was given to candidates by any individual airline, with 85 percent of the money going to Democrats, many of whom joined the majority House Republicans in supporting the legislation.
Before the vote, the Allied Pilots Association, which represents American Airlines pilots, urged its members to call lawmakers and ask them to increase the number of pilots who could carry guns.
In strengthening airline security following the attacks, lawmakers gave the decision to arm pilots to the TSA. After Magaw announced the administration's decision against guns in the cockpits, lawmakers in both houses introduced legislation to overturn that action.
Magaw said the presence of air marshals on board many flights and the use of reinforced cockpit doors provide sufficient protection against terrorists.
Although passage in the House had been predicted, the legislation faced difficult obstacles on the other side of the Capitol.
Congressional aides have suggested that the measure may be offered as an amendment to a bill providing money for the Transportation Department, because Hollings' opposition is enough under Senate rules to keep the armed-pilots bill from coming up for a vote.
"A freestanding bill is not the only way to pass something in the Senate," said Sen. Robert Smith ( news, bio, voting record), R-N.H.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...pilots_guns_11
------------
WASHINGTON (AP) - Airline pilots could carry guns in the cockpit to defend their planes against terrorists under a bill the House passed overwhelmingly Wednesday despite the opposition of the White House.
The legislation, approved by a vote of 310-113, would allow guns for more than 70,000 pilots if they agreed to undergo training. Lawmakers stripped out provisions that would have limited the program to some 1,400 pilots, about 2 percent of those flying.
Despite the strong House support, prospects in the Senate were not good for the legislation. Besides the White House, those opposing it include Ernest Hollings, a South Carolina Democrat who heads the Senate Commerce Committee.
The guns-in-cockpits question is among a host of aviation security issues that arose after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. In this case, House GOP leaders have been at odds with the administration, which has repeatedly argued that cockpit crews should focus on flying planes and let air marshals worry about security.
Though Republican and Democratic leaders of the House Transportation Committee agreed to arm only a fraction of the pilots, rank-and-file lawmakers voted to expand the program to any pilot who volunteers.
"If there is a credible threat that requires arming pilots, why would you restrict yourself?" said an amendment sponsor, Rep. Peter DeFazio ( news, bio, voting record), D-Ore. "Having that minuscule number of pilots trained and armed would not make any sense. If the pilots should be armed, there should be some significant number."
The measure also would require more self-defense training for flight attendants and give the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) 90 days to act on an airline's request to equip pilots and flight attendants with non-lethal weapons such as stun guns.
"Today, armed F-16s are prepared to shoot down any commercial jet that is hijacked by terrorists," said Transportation Committee chairman Don Young, R-Alaska. "It is imperative that under these new circumstances, we must allow trained and qualified pilots to serve as the last line of defense against such a potential disaster."
Opponents of the legislation have expressed concern that an errant bullet could kill a passenger or knock out a critical electrical system.
A flight attendants union also opposed arming pilots.
"Giving guns to pilots without specific cabin defense requirements for airlines could be deadly for flight attendants and passengers," Patricia Friend, president of the Association of Flight Attendants, said last month.
TSA head John Magaw, who announced the administration's position against guns in cockpits, has said that a pilot should give undivided attention to flying his plane, landing it as quickly as possible and conducting in-flight maneuvers to keep hijackers off balance.
Rep. John Mica ( news, bio, voting record), chairman of the House aviation subcommittee, dismissed the administration's objections.
"Bureaucrats set the rules. We set the policy and the laws," said Mica, R-Fla.
Pilots' unions said their members needed the guns to prevent terrorists from breaking into cockpits and commandeering airplanes, as happened last September.
The Air Line Pilots Association ( news - web sites) has contributed $764,000 to federal candidates since Jan. 1, 2001. That's more in donations than was given to candidates by any individual airline, with 85 percent of the money going to Democrats, many of whom joined the majority House Republicans in supporting the legislation.
Before the vote, the Allied Pilots Association, which represents American Airlines pilots, urged its members to call lawmakers and ask them to increase the number of pilots who could carry guns.
In strengthening airline security following the attacks, lawmakers gave the decision to arm pilots to the TSA. After Magaw announced the administration's decision against guns in the cockpits, lawmakers in both houses introduced legislation to overturn that action.
Magaw said the presence of air marshals on board many flights and the use of reinforced cockpit doors provide sufficient protection against terrorists.
Although passage in the House had been predicted, the legislation faced difficult obstacles on the other side of the Capitol.
Congressional aides have suggested that the measure may be offered as an amendment to a bill providing money for the Transportation Department, because Hollings' opposition is enough under Senate rules to keep the armed-pilots bill from coming up for a vote.
"A freestanding bill is not the only way to pass something in the Senate," said Sen. Robert Smith ( news, bio, voting record), R-N.H.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep, looks like they have finally lost it over there. Lets hope Osama doesn't pick on buses, trains, ships or push chairs next time or everyone will be 'tooled up'. Wish they could get on with life, the rest of the world have been living with terrorism for decades.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: uk
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fantastic...NOT. Now you dont need to smuggle a weapon on board...the feds have done it for you. Mind you, one would have to have the cockpit door open in order to use it. Unless of course you were an unstable Pilot about to "do the postal thing".
Thank God it wont happen over here.
Thank God it wont happen over here.
Moderator
Now you dont need to smuggle a weapon on board...the feds have done it for you.
They've been doing it for years. Armed LEO's are always on board with guns in the CABIN. If this passes, at least the guns will be on the correct side of the cockpit door........
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How would the crew get through UK securuty if starting a duty in UK?
We can't even take a pair of nail scissors on board - negating the possibility of a vicious manicure any where in European airspace!!
We can't even take a pair of nail scissors on board - negating the possibility of a vicious manicure any where in European airspace!!
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: I wish I knew
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why don't they just wire a bomb into all aircraft that can be remotely detonated by ATC. Then they'll really have control.
"AmericanXX, you are identified and cleared to explode..."
"AmericanXX, you are identified and cleared to explode..."
Join Date: Jul 1998
Location: Cornwall
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where would these gun(s) be stored? How would they be accessed? Would they be loaded and cocked from, say crew handover? etc. etc. etc. Uk police procedure is very clear in respect of landing in UK with gun(s) on board a civil operator; you must give sufficient notice before date/time of landing, usually to be done through the appropriate authority, then they will board, take an inventory and confiscate the gun(s) & ammunition for the duration. Then we haven't even started with the Swiss and their rules vis a vis overflight and landing Switzerland with guns & ammunition...............
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having a gun in the cockpit will not stop suicide bombers walking into a terminal building or walking through the FBO (where there is zero security) and using a bizjet as a missile. As always prevention is better than a cure. The USA should put their foreign policy under the microscope and try to work with the rest of the world instead of trying to dictate to it. The lives and futures of foreign nationals are worth more than dollars and votes, which at the end of the day is all the Presidency is concerned about. The
Federal Reserve is controlled by private, non muslim banks, no friends,no money, no vote, no White House occupancy.
Federal Reserve is controlled by private, non muslim banks, no friends,no money, no vote, no White House occupancy.
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
breguet, do you think that a terrorist who uses a pax or F/A as a human shield/hostage, might have even WORSE plans for everybody, once he gains admittance?
A Tazer (or 2) stowed in the cockpit - along with the crash axe yes we ALREADY have that !!
But please - NO SWISS ARMY KNIVES NOR NAILFILES
A Tazer (or 2) stowed in the cockpit - along with the crash axe
yes we ALREADY have that !!But please - NO SWISS ARMY KNIVES NOR NAILFILES
"AmericanXX, you are identified and cleared to explode..."
Low-pass,
You above qoute may have been a lame attempt at humor, it wasn't funny.
26 of my coworkers were slaughtered on 9/11,or died in the A300 accident last fall. Another 13 almost were scattered over the Atlantic with a bomb by a Brit Islamic fundelmentalist scumbag.
In the future, referring to "Airliner XYZ" might be more appropriate.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Nova
Posts: 1,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WhatsaLizard
Could you tell me, did your airline have a locked flight deck door policy prior to August of last year? If it did, how much use do you think it was?
Second, what makes you people on that side of the pond think you have a monopoly on the best ways to defeat "terrorism"? when you only just encountered it?
I too have lost friends. Whatever makes you think that arming pilots, locking doors, searching peoples shoes, posting armed guards at check in etc. will improve yours, mine, or anyone else's security?
When was the last time you heard a terrorist say - "Let's hit them right where they most expect it"?
Accept it. You CAN learn from others!
Fly safe
Could you tell me, did your airline have a locked flight deck door policy prior to August of last year? If it did, how much use do you think it was?
Second, what makes you people on that side of the pond think you have a monopoly on the best ways to defeat "terrorism"? when you only just encountered it?
I too have lost friends. Whatever makes you think that arming pilots, locking doors, searching peoples shoes, posting armed guards at check in etc. will improve yours, mine, or anyone else's security?
When was the last time you heard a terrorist say - "Let's hit them right where they most expect it"?
Accept it. You CAN learn from others!
Fly safe
searching peoples shoes,
Tandemrotor,
You have got to be kidding? Here is a fact. If my company had gave me the FAA information about the possibility of shoe weapons, and I was informed about this scumbag Islamic fundementalist Reid, and got a look at those hightop shoes, I guarantee that I would have said, "did you check the shoes?"
Pressed for time right now, I respond to your other points later.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: On top of the world!
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although I'm against having guns on board, be it terrorist or crewmember carrying them, I'm interested in how they intend to implement this.
My thought would be the new smart guns where only a specified user or users can use the guns, i.e. the gun won't fire unless the right fingerprint is on the handle. The gun or guns for that matter would never leave the cockpit during stopovers. They would always be stowed in a locked compartment
In an ideal perfect world the gun will always recognise the right fingerprints and a shot can't go off any other way. Also in an ideal world all pilots would be expert marksmen and would never ever miss the terrorists and accidentally shoot an inocent passenger.
However a gun may very well be a threat to a terrorist intending to use a small knife. And maybe the notion alone of a gun aboard the airplane within the reach of a crewmember is enough to deter terrorists from hijacking planes.
"All you need is faith" When you have faith nothing will stop you.
I'm not sure guns will do the job but we need to turn the tables against this new kind of terrorism. Going along with everything the terrorists demand is not the way to do things today. It will be interesting to see how things will progress.
My thought would be the new smart guns where only a specified user or users can use the guns, i.e. the gun won't fire unless the right fingerprint is on the handle. The gun or guns for that matter would never leave the cockpit during stopovers. They would always be stowed in a locked compartment
In an ideal perfect world the gun will always recognise the right fingerprints and a shot can't go off any other way. Also in an ideal world all pilots would be expert marksmen and would never ever miss the terrorists and accidentally shoot an inocent passenger.
However a gun may very well be a threat to a terrorist intending to use a small knife. And maybe the notion alone of a gun aboard the airplane within the reach of a crewmember is enough to deter terrorists from hijacking planes.
"All you need is faith" When you have faith nothing will stop you.
I'm not sure guns will do the job but we need to turn the tables against this new kind of terrorism. Going along with everything the terrorists demand is not the way to do things today. It will be interesting to see how things will progress.
Could you tell me, did your airline have a locked flight deck door policy prior to August of last year? If it did, how much use do you think it was?
Second, what makes you people on that side of the pond think you have a monopoly on the best ways to defeat "terrorism"? when you only just encountered it?
I do not believe the US has any "monopoly" on dealing with terrorism, however forgive us if we fail to ask your permission regarding the operating practices of 12 aircraft carriers, 100 subs, and 900 attack aircraft. Criticism of incidental contact with the ordance of these force should be accepted however.
I too have lost friends. Whatever makes you think that arming pilots, locking doors, searching peoples shoes, posting armed guards at check in etc. will improve yours, mine, or anyone else's security?
We were extremely lucky some "nutter" or a terrorist didn't bring down an aircraft before 9/11/. Unrelated to the Islamic fundementalist attack of 9/11 were several instances of attacks on the cockpit. I was for a reinforced door before 9/11 due to instances like the BA-747, Alaska Air, Southwest Air, and a few AA instances (one a crazy naked lady, looks unknown). The airlines should have been also monitoring the rising popularity of suicide terrorist attacks and the apparent societal approval of them by somewhat large percentages of Muslim countries. there was enough celebrating after 9/11 by educated groups in many of these countries that I will never forget nor forgive. Yes, the US goverment ignored the warning signs too.
2."searching peoples shoes"
I think I covered that one previously. An additional note. I watched a couple walk through a metal detector outside the US, and the female set it off during her walk through. I watched her wanded by security, she smiled saying her numerous bracelets set it off, then happily walked to her flight. Her screener never wanded what I believe is known as a "Hijab" covering her head and shoulders, nor her somewhat large heeled boots. She went off to her domestic flight, in our same gate area. I do wish she had been wanded all over and her shoes checked. Yes I do fear the blond, blue eyed descendent of the Crusades that may slip through also.
3."posting armed guards"
A Grocery store near me has a armed guard posted at the entrance. I think 250 people in line near a public curb deserve the same. Terminal attacks can make a big "splash" for these scumbags. If the grocery store can have a armed guard, why can't a terminal area. Before anyone comments on the crime in America, this same chain of stores only post guards at certain stores, near problem areas. If London isn't like that, it will be in the future.
When was the last time you heard a terrorist say - "Let's hit them right where they most expect it"?
Accept it. You CAN learn from others!
Fly safe
